Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 14:12:51 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet tcp_subr.c tcp_var.h Message-ID: <20040420141059.Q25391@odysseus.silby.com> In-Reply-To: <20040420054638.E27872@root.org> References: <200404200633.i3K6XdXn067858@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040420032850.H20848@odysseus.silby.com> <20040420054638.E27872@root.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Nate Lawson wrote: > > I think that we may have to break away from standard RFC handling and > > change the TIME_WAIT code in tcp_input so that it will accept any SYN > > packet coming in without regard to the sequence number, forcing the > > TIME_WAIT socket to be recycled. > > It's been a while since I looked at all the RFCs, but can the window scale > option be taken into account for this? I'm thinking that if you receive a > packet while in TIME_WAIT with the proper window scale + sequence, accept > it, otherwise discard. As for initial sequences, make them less dependent > on port/address combos. Not sure if this will solve your problem. > > -Nate I don't see how the window scale option would change the situation at all. Making ISNs less dependent on the port/address pair isn't a solution either, their dependence on port/address is RFC1948's best property! In the face of high speed networks, we may just have to drop the check completely. Mike "Silby" Silbersackhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040420141059.Q25391>